The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

Late this afternoon BP was handed yet another setback in a long line of courtroom rejections of the company’s “nonsensical” position relating to the implementation of its own Settlement Agreement. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled against BP on both the propriety of the certification of its class action settlement as well as the so-called “causation” element. The 5th Circuit, along with the lower court and the settlement program’s Claims Administrator, have now definitively held, on numerous occasions, that BP must abide by the clear terms of the Contract it negotiated and signed. To do otherwise was rightly recognized as outrageous.

While I will have more commentary on these significant developments tomorrow, here are the opinions in the appeals, with curiously strong dissents by Judge Edith Clement.

BEL Panel En Banc 13-30315

BEL Panel En Banc Order 13-30315

Certification Panel En Banc 13-30095

Comments are closed.